We have newborn hearing screening, which is wonderful. It means that we know whether children are deaf at an early age, before they leave the maternity hospital. They are provided with hearing aids earlier, and cochlear implantation has been taking place earlier than ever before. However, the idea that British Sign Language can be used with children right at that early stage, when it is basically the only language that they can communicate with naturally and have full access to, is often not suggested. BSL is not suggested as a positive option for children.
An important issue is who is part of the multi-agency group. If a child has been diagnosed as deaf, it is important to try to dispel the deficit approach that suggests that that is the end of the world. Deaf people need to be involved in the multi-agency group so that parents can meet deaf people who communicate effectively, who are married and have children and who function in society. That is a much more positive way of looking at deafness.
10:15
We must also raise awareness in the health profession about the positive effect of teaching children and the importance of giving them access to a language as early as possible. Health professionals often discourage parents from making use of sign language. Basically, they say that signing with a child will affect their spoken language development, but the evidence shows that that is not the case. We have to dispel that.
We just accept language delay for deaf children. We say that, if someone is deaf, we will give them hearing aids and cochlear implants, and we accept that there will be times in their lives when they will not be able to communicate, such as while they are waiting for cochlear implantation or if they have a cochlear implant and take it out at night. We accept that there are times when deaf people are not able to communicate, but that is because of our monolingual approach to deaf education.
Throughout the world, bilingualism is thought of as a fantastic thing for cognitive development, but when it comes to deaf children we say, “No—don’t sign.” That is the advice that parents of deaf children are being given. If they are told by a consultant not to sign with their child, that will have a massive effect on how they view British Sign Language. To raise the attainment of deaf children, we must allow them to develop cognitively, and to do that they need a language. There is a language there that they could have access to, but we are denying them access to it.
We should say to people who have a deaf child at an early age that British Sign Language might be a good thing to learn. We should tell them that using BSL would mean that, from an early age, their child’s mind would be developing and cognitively active. We have to support that and provide parents with sign language classes in the home. I am not saying that that does not happen in Scotland—it does, and we should learn from that good practice—but it is not the norm. We are leaving children with no language so that we can focus on spoken language.
To improve attainment, we should give children language as early as possible. That is my experience. There is a language available, and it may not be easy but, by supporting parents, teaching them sign language in the home and making it accessible, we can help them to learn it. It might not be reasonable to expect someone with a new baby to go to a class, so we have to think outside the box and provide support for families to learn sign language, and we must dispel the deficit idea that spoken language will be held back because of using sign language, when the opposite is the case.